Skip to main content
Log in

Some implications of recidivism as a criterion in program evaluation

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article discusses the use of recidivism statistics in corrections. Recent attacks on the relevance of recidivism have come from both the left and the right of the political spectrum. It is argued here that despite these attacks there are still reasonable grounds for maintaining rehabilitation as a major goal, and recidivism as a meaningful criterion of that goal. The purpose of this essay, however, is not so much to defend the use of recidivism, as to caution against its narrow use. Examples are given from the areas of parole contracts, juvenile awareness programs and approaches to probation and parole to illustrate the possible misuse of recidivism. It is argued here that it is more important to evaluate the effect of a program on a system, than to try to evaluate its impact on individual offenders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Dietrich, S. The probation officer as therapist. Federal Probation, 1979, 43, 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffee, D. & Fitch, R. An introduction to correction: a policy and systems approach. Pacific Palisades, Calf.: Goodyear, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkenauer, J.O. SCARED STRAIGHT! and the panacea phenomenon. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogel, D. We are the living proof: the justice model for corrections. Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing Co., 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, B. The American prison: the end of our era. Federal Probation, 1979, 43, 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gendreau, P. & Ross, B. Effective correctional treatment: bibliotherapy for cynics. Crime and Delinquency, 1979, 25, 463–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, D. The effectiveness of a prison and parole system. Indianapolis, Ind.: Bobbs-Merrill, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grupp, S. (Ed.) Theories of punishment. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homant, R.J. Therapy effectiveness in a correctinal institution. Offender Rehabilitation, 1976, 1, 101–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homant, R.J. Motivation, need, and therapy effectiveness in an correctional institution. Offender Rehabilitation, 1978, 2, 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homant, R.J. Determinate sentencing and prisoner attitudes. Offender Rehabilitation, 1978, 2, 351–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homant, R.J. The demise of JOLT: the politics of being scared straight in Michigan. Criminal Justice Review, 1981, 6, 14–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, D.B. & Kelly, T.M. The swinging pendulum of correctional reform. Criminal Justice Review, 1981, 6, 44–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lillyquist, M. Understanding and changing criminal behavior. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipton, D., Martinson, R. & Wilks, J. The effectiveness of correctional treatment: a survey of treatment evaluation studies. New York, N.Y.: Praeger, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNamara, D.E.J. The medical model in corrections: requiescat in pace. Criminology, 1977, 4, 439–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinson, R. What works? Questions and answers about prison reform. The Public Interest, Spring, 1974, 22–54.

  • Menninger, K. The crime of punishment. New York, N.Y.: Viking Press, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W.B. Lower class structure and generating milieu of gang delinquency. Journal of Social Issues, 1958, 14, 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W.B. Ideology and criminal justice policy. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1973, 64, 141–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, R. & Wenk, E. Social climates in prison: an attempt to conceptualize factors in total institutions. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1972, 9, 134–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. (Ed.) Instead of prisons. Syracuse, N.Y.: Prison Research Education Action Project, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, N. The future of imprisonment. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutual Agreement Programming: An Overview. Parole-Corrections Project, American Correctional Association, 1974.

  • Pallone, N.J. & Hennessey, J.J. Empirical derivation of a scale for recidivism proneness among parolees. Offender Rehabilitation, 1977, 2, 95–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinney, R. Criminology: analysis and critique of crime in America. Boston, Mass.: Little, Brown and Company, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toch, H. Living in prisons. New York, N.Y.: The Free Press, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, M.O. Correctional treatment and coercion. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1977, 4, 355–76.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, K.N. An examination of recidivism trends in relation to organizational rather than program differences. Journal of Offender Counseling, Services and Rehabilitation. 1979, 4, 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yocheloson, S. & Samenow, S. The criminal personality, Vol. 1. New York, N.Y.: Aronson, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Homant, R.J. Some implications of recidivism as a criterion in program evaluation. AJCJ 8, 3–15 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03373796

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03373796

Keywords

Navigation